get_resource_dependencies

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state what the tool returns, whether it has side effects, what errors may occur, or any other behavioral nuance. The description is silent on all non-obvious aspects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short (two words), but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks any meaningful structure or front-loaded information. While it is efficient, it omits all necessary detail, so it cannot be praised for conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description should at least explain what a dependency is and what the tool returns. It does neither. The definition is completely inadequate for an agent to understand or use the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare 'resource_path' string parameter. It does not. No explanation of what the parameter represents, expected format, or constraints is given. The description adds zero semantic value beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Gets resource deps' essentially restates the tool name 'get_resource_dependencies', offering no additional specificity. It fails to clarify what a 'resource dependency' is or how this differs from sibling tools like get_resource_info or list_resources. This is a tautology.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or when to prefer get_resource_info or list_resources instead. The agent is left entirely without direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.